Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Germain Date: Oct 16, 2011 10:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Can you tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 on a blind test?

A good way to visualize the difference between lossless and lossy files is to think of a high resolution photo in which small variations in color and shading are clear & crisp. Now print that photo on a printer that has a palate of say 256 colors. Your print will be good, but it will loose some of the sharpness of detail present in the photo.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dark.starz Date: Oct 16, 2011 6:18pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Can you tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 on a blind test?

Personally, i own a rather large collection of LPs, CDs, DVDs and Casette Tapes which are in boxes and storage.

One of these day's i'll need to begin the arduous process of transferring the cassettes to digital for several of the tapes are going on 40 years old now and i'll probably only get one good roll over the tape head of my Nak CR-7A before the oxide begins to fall apart.

That being said, if i'm going to transfer these recordings, several of which are first and second generation masters, i would insist on the highest resolution digital storage medium possible.

Therefore, it's a no-brainer to always store lossless. Multi terabyte dual raid hard drives are relatively inexpensive.

Look, one of the most knowledgeable audio gurus here at the forum is a man named Charlie Miller. Have you ever seen one of his recordings that was encoded in mp-3?


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bernlin2000 Date: Dec 16, 2012 8:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Can you tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 on a blind test?

Not a very fair analogy, though: top-notched variable-bitrate MP3s will sound as good as any FLAC. It's more like the difference between viewing 8 megapixel images on your computer vs. 30 megapixel. You simply can't tell the difference in quality at that scale, and in this analogy you'd have to blow the picture up to monstrous proportions to have any hope of discerning a difference. FLACs are most useful for trading, because they ensure that the person who did the encoding didn't introduce flaws (somehow...bad encoder perhaps?), and also it removes the issue of "too many generations", since FLACs are essentially the same as CD Audio. For personal use though I don't see any justification for using FLACs over MP3s...you simply can't notice a different in quality over a 240 avg kbps MP3 vs a standard FLAC.